Journal of Threatened
Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 December 2025 | 17(12): 28026-28035
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.9980.17.12.28026-28035
#9980 | Received 05 June 2025 | Final received 08 December 2025 | Finally
accepted 13 December 2025
Ectoparasites of Sumatran
Elephants at Tangkahan Elephant Camp, Langkat, North Sumatra
Kaniwa Berliani 1 , Destiny Simarmata 2 , Wahdi Azmi 3, Fithria Edhi 4 & Cynthia Gozali 5
1,2,5 Department of Biology, Faculty of
Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, North
Sumatra 20155, Indonesia.
3 Conservation Response Unit
Tangkahan, Desa Namu Sialang, Batang Serangan, Langkat, North Sumatra, 20852
Indonesia.
4 Conservation Response Unit Aceh,
Academic Activity Center Dayan Dawood Gedung Flamboyan, Lantai II, Universitas
Syiah Kuala (USK), Banda Aceh 24415, Indonesia.
1 kaniwa.berliani@usu.ac.id
(corresponding author), 2 simarmatadestiny@gmail.com, 3 wahdiazmi@yahoo.com,
4 fithria.edhi@gmail.com, 5 cynthiagozali8@gmail.com
Editor: L.D. Singla, Guru
Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana, India. Date of publication: 26 December 2025 (online & print)
Citation:
Berliani, K., D. Simarmata, W. Azmi, F. Edhi & C. Gozali (2025). Ectoparasites
of Sumatran Elephants at Tangkahan Elephant Camp, Langkat, North Sumatra. Journal of Threatened Taxa 17(12): 28026-28035. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.9980.17.12.28026-28035
Copyright: © Berliani et al. 2025. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in
any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of
publication.
Funding: The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were
received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Author details: Dr. Kaniwa Berliani S.Si.,
M.Si. is a biology lecturer
at the University of Sumatera Utara. She completed
his last education, namely S3 Tropical Biodiversity Conservation at the Bogor
Agricultural Institute in 2017. Active in various conservation activities related to wildlife conservation issues. Destiny Simarmata has completed her bachelor’s
degree under the research’s guidance of Kaniwa Berliani. Wahdi Azmi has dedicated his professional career to the
conservation of Aceh, with a focus on elephant
conservation, having worked for Fauna and Flora International (FFI) between
1998–2012. He therefore has an in-depth understanding of how international
organisations work and how these must comply within Achenes conservation
frameworks. During his time at FFI, Wahdi established, and remains
the director of, three Conservation Response Units (CRUs). Fithria Edhi is a researcher affiliated with
the Conservation Response Unit (CRU) Aceh and the Academic Activity Center
Dayan Dawood, Universitas Syiah Kuala (USK), Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Her
research interests focus on wildlife conservation, animal health, and
ecological monitoring of endangered species, particularly Sumatran elephants. Cynthia Gozali is a bachelor’s student from
Biology Department, Universitas Sumatera Utara. She pursued her
master degree and graduate in biomedical science majoring microbiology at
Universitas Indonesia.
Author contributions: KB—wrote the first draft of the manuscript, managed the analyses of the
study, proofread, and approved the manuscript. DS—managed the
analyses of the study, literature searches, read and approved the manuscript.
WA—managed the analyses of the study, literature searches, read and approved
the manuscript. FE—designed the research
project and approved the final manuscript. CG—read, finalization, submission, and approval of the
manuscript.
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to express
their deepest appreciation to the Department of Biology, Universitas Sumatera
Utara, the Conservation Response Unit Tangkahan,
Gunung Leuser National Park, and the Conservation Response Unit Aceh for their
support throughout this research.
Abstract: The Sumatran Elephant Elephas
maximus sumatranus is an endemic species of Indonesia, currently classified
as ‘Critically Endangered’. To ensure its continued existence, conservation
efforts are crucial. One of the health threats faced by Sumatran elephants is
ectoparasites. The present study, conducted from January–February 2020,
investigates types, prevalence, and intensity of ectoparasite infestations in
Sumatran Elephants at the Conservation Response Unit (CRU) Tangkahan, Langkat,
North Sumatra. Eight Sumatran Elephants were sampled, including three juveniles
(4 years old) and five adults (aged 26–50 years). The research employed
palpation and sweeping net methods. Sample examination was conducted at the
Animal Systematics Laboratory, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences,
Universitas Sumatera Utara. The study identified 10 species of ectoparasites
from 317 specimens: Haemadipsa jeylanica, H. picta, H.
pluvialis, Musca domestica, Stomoxys sp., Tabanus
sp.1, Tabanus sp.2, Tabanus sp.3, Tabanus sp.4, and Tabanus
sp.5. Haemadipsa jeylanica exhibited the highest prevalence at 87.5%,
categorized as ‘usually,’ while Tabanus sp.4 had the lowest prevalence
at 50%, categorized as ‘frequently.’ Additionally, Haemadipsa jeylanica
showed the highest intensity at 6.42, categorized as ‘moderate,’ whereas Tabanus
sp.5 had the lowest intensity at 3.4, categorized as ‘light.’
Keywords: Biting flies, conservation
response unit, ectoparasites, Elephas maximus sumatranus,
identification, Indonesia, leeches, parasite intensity, parasite prevalence,
Sumatran Elephant, Tabanus, Tangkahan, wildlife health.
INTRODUCTION
The
Sumatran Elephant is exclusively found on the island of Sumatra. Elephant
health is crucial for maintaining populations (Berliani et al. 2022), where
challenges include ectoparasites that live on exterior surfaces such as the
skin, ear cavities, nose, fur, tail, and eyes (Iqbal et al. 2014). Elephant
ectoparasites include flies, lice, mosquitoes, ticks, and mites that can impair
animal health by reducing appetite and blood-sucking, leading to weakened
immunity, weight loss, and decreased skin quality, and they can also aid transmission
of pathogens such as viruses, bacteria, protozoa, worms, and fungi (Levine
1990). Severe infestations can result in death (Sahito et al. 2017), and
symptoms can also cause discomfort and restlessness, disrupting animal
activities (Hadi et al. 2016).
The
Conservation Response Unit (CRU) Tangkahan is a conservation organization for
Sumatran Elephants. One of CRU’s functions is to patrol and protect the forest
from illegal activities that threaten conservation efforts. Healthy elephants
are essential for effectively performing their roles and functions. The local
community in Tangkahan also benefits from the presence of Sumatran elephants,
as they help protect the forest and boost community welfare through ecotourism
activities. Maintaining the elephants’ health, particularly against diseases
caused by ectoparasites, is crucial to enhancing their role.
METHODS
Study Area
This study
was carried out from January to February 2020 at the Conservation Response Unit
(CRU) Tangkahan, situated in Namo Sialang Village, Batang Serangan District,
Langkat Regency, North Sumatra Province. Renowned for its pristine rainforests,
Tangkahan offers a rich natural environment that includes wild orangutans,
waterfalls, caves, and hot springs. The area supports a wide array of flora and
fauna, including numerous plant species vital to the diet of Sumatran
Elephants. Characterized by a tropical rainforest climate, Tangkahan
experiences high humidity and substantial rainfall year-round. These lush
environmental conditions make it an ideal habitat for diverse wildlife,
particularly the Critically Endangered Sumatran Elephant.
Sampling
Procedure and Ectoparasite Collections
The
research subjects included eight Sumatran Elephants, three juveniles (4 years
old), and five adults (aged 26–50 years). Data collection on ectoparasites was
carried out using the palpation method over the entire body of the elephants
and the sweep net method (net traps). Temperature and humidity were also
measured. Sampling took place over 14 days, with captures conducted twice a
day. The first capture was performed from 0900–1100 h and the second from
1500–1700 h. Morning sessions typically ranged 25–27 oC with high
humidity, while afternoon sessions reached 28–30 oC with slightly
lower humidity. Leeches were more abundant in cooler, more humid conditions,
while flies were more active during warmer hours. The captured ectoparasites
were placed in collection bottles containing 70% alcohol and labelled for
subsequent identification and counting.
Ectoparasite
Identification and Analysis
The
identification of ectoparasities captured and stored with the help of keys and
descriptions provided by Leahy (1987) and Borror et al. (1992). The prevalence
of ectoparasites was calculated using the formula by Soulsby (1982), and the
intensity of ectoparasite infestations was determined using the formula by
Williams & Williams (1996).
Total number of individuals of a given
ectoparasite species
Intensity =
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of elephant
infested by that species
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
Data for
ectoparasites collected are summarized in Table 1. Specimens were identified
from two phyla (Arthropoda and Annelida), two classes (Insecta and Clitellata),
two orders (Diptera and Arhynchobdellida), three families (Tabanidae,
Muscidae, and Haemadipsidae), five genera (Tabanus,
Haematopota, Stomoxys, Musca, and Haemadipsa), and 10
species: Tabanus sp.1, Tabanus sp.2, Tabanus sp.3,
Tabanus sp.4, Tabanus sp.5, Haematopota pluvialis, Stomoxys
sp., Musca domestica, Haemadipsa jeylanica, and Haemadipsa
picta. The most dominant ectoparasite species found was Tabanus spp.
from the family Tabanidae. This is likely due to the suitability of the Tabanus
spp. fly’s environment with the research location. Ectoparasites attached to
the elephants’ skin, such as leeches (Haemadipsa jeylanica and H.
picta), were collected by palpation. In contrast, flying ectoparasites (Tabanus
spp., Haematopota pluvialis, Stomoxys sp., and M.
domestica) were collected using sweep nets as they approached the
elephants. Sampling was carried out twice daily, with morning sessions
(0900–1100 h) yielding more leeches, while afternoon sessions (1500–1700 h)
yielded higher numbers of biting flies. During sampling, morning sessions were
cooler and more humid
(approximately 25–27 °C), whereas afternoon sessions were warmer
at 28–30°C with slightly lower humidity, supporting the observation that
leeches were more abundant in cooler, humid conditions and flies were more
active during warmer periods.
Regarding
collection timings, we observed that biting flies (Tabanus spp., Haematopota
pluvialis) were more frequently trapped in the late afternoon session
(1500–1700 h), consistent with their diurnal peak activity in warmer sunlight
hours. Conversely, leeches (Haemadipsa spp.) were more commonly
recovered in the morning session (0900–1100 h), often after the elephants had
contact with moist vegetation and forest floor.
The CRU is
located adjacent to the forest and close to a river. This setting provides an
ideal habitat for Tabanus sp. According to Changbunjong et al. (2018), Tabanus
spp. females typically lay their eggs on the surface of leaves or places
situated above the water surface. The presence of ectoparasites tends to be
higher in forests with dense trees and proximity to streams. In the morning and at night,
these flies tend to hide, while during full sunlight and towards the evening,
they become active and approach the elephants to feed on their blood.
Additionally, when the weather is cold or during rain, the flies seek warm
hiding spots, such as between the thick hairs on the elephant’s belly or in the
inguinal area.
A total of
568 individual ectoparasites were found on the eight Sumatran Elephants,
comprising 10 different species (Table 2). Musca domestica was recorded
during sampling but is not considered a true ectoparasite, as it does not
attach to the host or feed on blood. Instead, this species functions as a
nuisance fly and mechanical vector that is commonly associated with animals and
their surrounding environment. Therefore, M. domestica is treated as an
associated dipteran and discussed separately from obligate ectoparasitic taxa
in this study. The number of ectoparasites found on adult elephants was higher
compared to juvenile elephants. When elephants are active, it is assumed that
ectoparasites, especially insects, find it more difficult to attach and feed.
The higher
ectoparasite load observed in adult elephants, despite generally stronger
immune systems, is likely influenced by ecological and behavioral factors
rather than immunity alone. Adults have a larger body surface area, spend more
time feeding within dense vegetation, and tend to be less active than
juveniles, all of which increase exposure to ectoparasites and facilitate
attachment. Unlike endoparasites, most ectoparasites (except leeches) are
temporary parasites with limited interaction with host immunity, making their
infestation patterns more dependent on environmental exposure and behavior than
age-related immune resistance. This contrasts with findings on endoparasites
(Levine 1990) and highlights the need to consider parasite groups separately
when evaluating host–parasite dynamics in elephants.
Table 3
presents the prevalence values of 10 types of ectoparasites found on eight
Sumatran Elephants in the CRU Tangkahan area. The highest prevalence was
observed for Haemadipsa jeylanica, with a prevalence rate of 87.5%,
categorized as “usually”. The lowest prevalence was observed for Tabanus
sp.4, with a prevalence rate of 50%, categorized as “frequently”. Adults
carried a total of 282 ectoparasites, while juveniles carried 38, confirming
that infestation levels were substantially higher in adult elephants.
Haemadipsa
jeylanica, or the mountain leech, is a blood-sucking organism closely related to
earthworms and equipped with a sucker. Haemadipsa is a species commonly
found in Indonesia, particularly in high-humidity mountainous regions. The life
cycle of such parasites heavily depends on a suitable environment, especially
high humidity and an adequate temperature (approximately 27 oC). In
this study, Haemadipsa sp. was frequently found on the elephants’
bodies, especially on the trunk and legs, when they were herded into the
forest. According to Kendall (2012), most Haemadipsa species suck
mammalian blood to survive. During their juvenile stage, Haemadipsa
attaches to smaller hosts like rats, but as adults, they attach to larger hosts
such as pigs and primates. The host’s body size also influences the size of Haemadipsa;
the larger the host, the more diverse the ectoparasitic fauna. Consequently, if
Haemadipsa attaches to an elephant in large numbers, it could cause
significant harm, such as blood loss.
The lowest
prevalence value was found in Tabanus sp.4, at 50%, categorized as
“frequently”. This species is most commonly found in elephant bathing areas.
Their activity increases during the dry season compared to the rainy season.
Male flies use nectar as a food source, while females suck blood and are often
significant pests for animals, especially large mammals like horses, deer,
cattle, and elephants. Tabanus spp. are diurnal and active during hot
weather conditions with high intensity sunlight (Kaufman et al. 2005).
According to Foil & Hogsette (1994), the flying activity of Tabanus
spp. for feeding by landing on hosts varies greatly depending on rhythm,
weather, and type of vegetation. These differences can vary significantly
between species. Generally, after female flies suck blood from their host, they
lay eggs on organic leaf litter, which then hatch into pupae and larvae, and
finally become adults within 1–3 weeks.
The
intensity levels of ectoparasites on eight Sumatran elephants are presented in
Table 4, with Tabanus spp. showing moderate intensity, and Tabanus sp.1
being the most frequently encountered species on the elephants’ bodies. This is likely due to the environmental
conditions at the research location being suitable for this species. The
ambient temperature ranged 25–30 oC, which is favorable for the
presence of Tabanus sp.1, particularly during the daytime when the sun
is at its peak. Most Tabanus flies are active during the day, with their
activity threshold peaking at 25 oC.
Conversely,
Tabanus sp.5 exhibited the lowest intensity level of 3.4, classified as
light. This species was the least frequently found on the elephants. The lower
numbers of Tabanus sp.5 may be due to the research environment being
less conducive to its survival. Environmental conditions significantly
influence the population size of a species. The low number of these species on
the host may also be attributed to the disturbance caused by sampling
activities, which could have disrupted the flies’ infestation.
Ectoparasites
on elephants exhibit distinct characteristics. The terrestrial leech Haemadipsa,
which feeds on the blood of both animals and humans, is frequently observed
attached to elephants, particularly on their trunks, front legs, and hind legs.
The images, sketches, and morphology of Haemadipsa found on Sumatran
Elephants at the CRU Tangkahan can be seen in Image 1. The sketches illustrate
the ventral (Image 1A) and dorsal (Image 1B) morphology of Haemadipsa.
The habitat and environmental temperature at the research location are believed
to be suitable for this species, particularly in forests with high humidity
levels. This species thrives among tree trunks, leaves, and moist soil, such as
in forests and swamps. Typically, this species is brownish, dark green, and
generally reddish-brown.
According
to Saywer (1986), Haemadipsa has a complete digestive tract. When
feeding, this species extends its proboscis out of its mouth, then uses its
pharynx to suck blood. The nervous system of these leeches is more developed
than other Annelida, as they possess large ganglia around the pharynx in the
fifth and sixth segments of their bodies. The Hirudinae phylum has specialized
sensory organs, including eyes and papillae. This species reproduces
hermaphroditically, cannot reproduce asexually, and lacks regenerative abilities.
Most of the Hirudinae phylum are parasitic, causing significant blood loss in
their hosts.
From Image
1, it can be seen that Haemadipsa jeylanica (C) and Haemadipsa picta
(D) have specific characteristics. Haemadipsa jeylanica is brightly
colored with stripes of red, yellow, and brown. Its sucker is black, and its
body is larger. This species is more often found on leaves, and its bite is
more painful compared to Haemadipsa picta. On the other hand, Haemadipsa
picta is uniformly brown, has a slimmer body, and is more commonly found in
moist soil.
According
to Foil & Hogsette (1994), Haematopota pluvialis is an ectoparasite
belonging to the family Tabanidae. This insect is smaller than species of the
genus Tabanus. Its morphology and life cycle are similar to those of Tabanus
species. Haematopota pluvialis is highly adaptable for hunting,
particularly during the day. It has a greyish-black colouration with white
spots on its wings and eyes, forming various patterns. The body of this
ectoparasite is elongated and slender. Adult female Haematopota pluvialis
take blood from their hosts to support egg development, while adult males only
feed on nectar from various flowering plants. Female Haematopota pluvialis
typically lay their eggs in moist soil.
In Image 2,
the morphology of Haematopota pluvialis is depicted, illustrating the
various parts of its body. This species typically attacks large mammals. Haematopota
pluvialis possesses a large mouth comprised of three pairs of elements that
function to cut and pierce the skin, causing deep wounds. Subsequently, the
flowing blood is absorbed through the labrum, which serves to store the blood
(Russell et al. 2013).
The
parasite-borne diseases transmitted through these highly painful bites can
cause significant losses, particularly for large mammal farmers (Taylor et al.
2012). These losses can include reduced profit margins due to decreased animal
live weight, lowered meat production, and skin irritation. Ectoparasites can
act as vectors of disease, such as transmitting Trypanosoma evansi, the
causative agent of surra. This protozoan parasite inhabits the blood plasma and
tissue fluids of infected animals (Desquesnes et al. 2012).
Stomoxys sp., a stable fly from the
Muscidae family, is an ectoparasite that attacks warm-blooded animals. Stomoxys
sp. closely resembles the species M. domestica but differs in having a
proboscis adapted for bloodsucking. Image 3 shows a morphological sketch of Stomoxys
sp. found on a Sumatran Elephant. The body size of Stomoxys sp. ranges
from 5–7 mm, with three dark stripes on the thorax and four veins on the wings.
Stomoxys sp. is black, with a yellow abdomen; the antenna consists of
three segments, with the last segment being the largest (Masmeatathip et al.
2006).
Stomoxys sp. feeds
by sucking blood for 3–4 minutes per feeding session. The volume of blood
ingested in a single session ranges from 0.05–0.10 cc per fly. This species
reproduces by laying eggs. Its life cycle begins with eggs that hatch into
larvae, then pupate, and finally mature into adults. These flies lay their eggs
on manure, in animal enclosures, and in other places with high moisture and
organic matter, such as animal waste (Cruz-Vazquez et al. 2004; Huang et al.
2007; Changbunjong et al. 2018). During the summer, these flies feed multiple
times a day, and their bites are sharply painful. Once satiated, they seek
preferred resting places to digest their meal. This species tends to aggregate
in bright areas rather than dark ones (Chareonviriyaphap 2012). When they are
hungry, cannibalism is common within their groups. They become highly active
and aggressive, attacking each other and sucking blood by wounding the abdomen.
According
to Phasuk et al. (2013), both male and female flies of this species are
bloodsuckers with painful bites. In large numbers, they can prevent animals
from resting properly. Stomoxys sp. can naturally act as a vector for
the bacterium Dermatophilus. This species also serves as a mechanical
vector for several pathogenic protozoa. For instance, Trypanosoma evansi,
which causes Surra disease, and Trypanosoma brucei, which causes nagana
disease in horses and cattle, can be transmitted by these flies (Desquesnes et
al. 2012). Their repeated blood-feeding behaviour facilitates the transmission
of nagana.
Musca
domestica is the most commonly encountered species worldwide and is generally
found on farms or in human environments, making it a vector for several
diseases affecting both humans and animals (Kaufman et al. 2005; Butler et al.
2010). This species thrives on manure, decaying garbage, foul-smelling drains,
and spoiled wet food (Sanchez & Cappinera 2014).
Image 4
illustrates the anatomical features of M. domestica. This species is of
medium size, measuring 6–8 mm in length. The thoracic cavity is grey, the
abdomen is yellow, and it possesses compound eyes and antennae consisting of
three segments, serving as both lickers and suckers. Adult female flies lay
eggs on decaying organic matter and garbage contaminated with faeces and urine.
The eggs are white, with a length ranging from 1.20–1.25 mm and a width of
0.25–0.30 mm. Their egg production can range from 120–150 eggs (Borror et al.
1992). The first instar larvae are small, slender, and white, with a length of
1.3–2.6 mm; the second instar measures 2.8–6.7 mm, while the third instar,
whitish in color, ranges from 6.5–12.5 mm in length. Larvae typically mature
within four to seven days. Development is hindered in cold weather, dry
environments, or inadequate food supply, prompting them to leave breeding sites
and pupate in the soil. The pupal stage of these flies generally ranges from
3–6 days and is reddish-brown in color during the summer. Food sources such as
vegetables, decaying animals, bodily secretions, and wounds are their main
diet. Most of them are active during the day, preferring light and sunlight,
but their numbers decrease in winter (Borror et al. 1992).
The
presence of M. domestica is suspected to act as a vector for disease
transmission from contaminated body parts such as the mouth, feces, and other
contaminated areas. According to Borror et al. (1992), favoured locations for
these flies include moist areas, such as the eye can thus, mouth, ears, nose,
vulva lips, and the surface of the penis hole. Ectoparasite attacks on the eyes
can cause excessive tearing, attract more flies, and leading to keratitis and
potential blindness.
Tabanus is a genus
of the largest flies and is considered an important pest (Kalshoven 1981).
These flies are large, measuring up to 25–30 mm in length, with a sturdy body
shape, wide wings, and strikingly large eyes. The wing veins have
characteristic patterns, and their proboscis is short and soft, directed
downwards. In the mouthparts, there are six organs fused into one used as a
piercing apparatus, consisting of a pair of flat and sharply toothed mandibles,
a pair of toothed maxillae, a hypopharynx, and an epipharynx. The mandibles are
used for cutting, while the maxillae are used for piercing and tearing tissues
along with the blood vessels (Borror et al. 1992). A morphological sketch of Tabanus
spp. found on Sumatran Elephants in the CRU Tangkahan area can be seen in Image
5.
Based on
Image 5, sketches of the body of Tabanus spp. (A), sketch of the head of
Tabanus sp. (B), and documentation results of Tabanus sp.1 (C), Tabanus
sp.2 (D), Tabanus sp.3 (E), Tabanus sp.4 (F), and Tabanus
sp.5 (G) represent the morphology displaying various parts of Tabanus.
Upon observation, these five species exhibit distinct characteristics,
primarily in their respective colours. In Tabanus sp.1, the thorax
appears orangish-brown, with dark green eyes. Tabanus sp.2 exhibits a
blackish-yellow thorax with bright green eyes. Moving on, Tabanus sp.3
has a whitish-black thorax, with bluish-green eyes. Furthermore, Tabanus
sp.4 displays a black thorax with greenish stripes, along with dark blue eyes.
Finally, Tabanus sp.5 presents a whitish-brown thorax and brown eyes.
Tabanus
flies prefer laying their eggs on vegetation. Most egg clusters are found on
plant clusters near elephant stall walls. These flies tend to seek places
closest to their resting spots for egg deposition. They particularly favour
leaf surfaces, presumably due to their relatively larger surface area compared
to other plant parts. Therefore, they tend to deposit their eggs on the
underside of leaves. According to Foil & Hogsette (1994), the eggs of these
flies are laid on plant parts and neatly arranged in layers into a cluster.
Tabanus flies are
commonly encountered during hot and sunny summer seasons, especially near their
breeding grounds. They are highly active during hot and humid weather. Female
flies are blood-sucking insects, while male flies feed on flower pollen or
nectar from flowering plants. During the study, female flies were observed
sucking blood from elephants, with their mouthparts acting as cutting and
sucking tools. Tabanus primarily attacks large animals such as
elephants, buffaloes, horses, and cattle. Their preferred feeding sites include
the lower flank, around the navel, legs, and neck. Once engorged with blood,
the flies leave the host and seek resting places on wood surfaces, rocks,
building walls, or under leaf surfaces. Subsequently, they search for
egg-laying sites (Foil & Hogsette 1994).
Each Tabanus
fly can bite two to three times before feeding on blood. Animals bitten by
these flies often bleed for a short period, causing painful wounds. Such biting
behavior enhances their efficiency as mechanical vectors for various diseases. Tabanus
also utilizes mandibles and serrated teeth. Their sharp upper jaws are used to
pierce the skin and rupture blood vessels. The Tabanus labrum is then
used to collect pooled blood formed from the fly’s bites, known as telmophages
(Seddon 1947).
According
to Onyido (2011), Tabanus flies serve as primary intermediate hosts of Trypanosoma
evansi, mechanically transmitting it. They can also transfer the blood
parasite to elephants, horses, goats, dogs, and other animals. Other diseases
transmitted by these flies include anthrax, equine infectious anemia, and
anaplasmosis.
The low
presence of ectoparasites on elephants in the CRU Tangkahan research site is
attributed to the elephants receiving good care, including mandatory bathing
twice daily—morning and evening—and regular cleaning of their pens. These
practices are essential for preventing ectoparasite infestations and diseases.
However, this condition should not be taken lightly by CRU management. There is
a concern that neglecting ectoparasite control could lead to higher parasite
burdens if not actively minimized. Hence, alongside the twice-daily bathing
program, CRU Tangkahan management also provides medications to alleviate
itching caused by ectoparasite bites and preventive medications for
endoparasites.
Assisted by
mahouts (elephant riders, trainers, or keepers), CRU Tangkahan management
endeavours to meet the needs and understand the behaviour of captive Sumatran
Elephants. This is evidenced by the elephants’ overall good health and
performance during various activities, whether as tourist attractions, in pens,
or while grazing in the forest. Maintaining such conditions is crucial for
enhancing ex-situ conservation efforts. This entails specific care for captive
elephants, including bathing techniques, feeding, medications, and regular
physical exercises. Considering the severity of ectoparasite infestations on
elephants, their current condition is not alarming. However, CRU management
also needs to assess the severity of endoparasite infestation levels to ensure
optimal health care for Sumatran Elephants. Moreover, routine health
examinations related to parasites are conducted.
According
to Berliani et al. (2022), if worms are found in elephant faeces, further
monitoring and treatment are carried out. Deworming of elephants is done every
three months. Additionally, daily examinations of teeth, mouth, and hooves are
performed. Furthermore, mahouts weigh the elephants once a month. In case of
health deterioration in elephants, veterinarians and mahouts collect blood,
urine, and faecal samples for laboratory analysis. Once the results are
obtained, appropriate medications are administered based on the veterinarian’s
diagnosis. Therefore, by paying attention to and maintaining the health of
elephants in the CRU Tangkahan area, efforts to conserve Sumatran Elephants’
ex-situ are being enhanced.
CONCLUSION
Ten types
of ectoparasites were identified: Haemadipsa jeylanica, H. picta,
Haematopota pluvialis, Musca domestica, Stomoxys sp., Tabanus
sp.1, Tabanus sp.2, Tabanus sp.3, Tabanus sp.4, and Tabanus
sp.5. The highest prevalence of ectoparasites were found in Haemadipsa
jeylanica, with a prevalence rate of 87.5%, categorized as “usually”,
whereas the lowest prevalence was observed in Tabanus sp.4, at 50%, categorized
as “frequently”. The highest intensity value was recorded in Tabanus sp.1 among
other Tabanus spp., with a score of 7, categorized as “moderate”, while
Tabanus sp.5 had the lowest intensity value of 3.4, categorized as “light”.
Table 1. Types of ectoparasites
collected.
|
Phylum |
Class |
Order |
Family |
Genus |
Species |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Tabanidae |
Tabanus |
Tabanus sp.1 |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Tabanidae |
Tabanus |
Tabanus sp.2 |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Tabanidae |
Tabanus |
Tabanus sp.3 |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Tabanidae |
Tabanus |
Tabanus sp.4 |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Tabanidae |
Tabanus |
Tabanus sp.5 |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Tabanidae |
Haematopota |
Haematopota pluvialis |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Muscidae |
Stomoxyy |
Stomoxy sp. |
|
Arthropoda |
Insecta |
Diptera |
Muscidae |
Musca |
Musca domestica |
|
Annelida |
Clitellata |
Arhyncobdellida |
Haemadipsidae |
Haemadipsa |
Haemadipsa jeylanica |
|
Annelida |
Clitellata |
Arhyncobdellida |
Haemadipsidae |
Haemadipsa |
Haemadipsa picta |
Table 2. Number of ectoparasites
found on individual elephants.
|
Ectoparasite |
Number of ectoparasites on
elephants (individuals) |
||||||||
|
Agustina (43 y.o.) |
Sari (30 y.o.) |
Theo (30 y.o.) |
Olive (28 y.o.) |
Yuni (29 y.o.) |
Eropa (4 y.o.) |
Christ (4 y.o.) |
Albertina (4 y.o.) |
Total |
|
|
Haemadipsa jeylanica |
10 |
8 |
7 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
0 |
45 |
|
Haemadipsa picta |
9 |
8 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
37 |
|
Haematopota pluvialis |
7 |
8 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
30 |
|
Musca domestica |
9 |
9 |
7 |
5 |
6 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
39 |
|
Stomoxys sp. |
9 |
8 |
8 |
6 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
37 |
|
Tabanus sp.1 |
9 |
8 |
6 |
7 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
35 |
|
Tabanus sp.2 |
8 |
4 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
32 |
|
Tabanus sp.3 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
31 |
|
Tabanus sp.4 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
14 |
|
Tabanus sp.5 |
6 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
4 |
2 |
17 |
|
Total |
78 |
65 |
57 |
46 |
36 |
26 |
9 |
3 |
317 |
Table 3. Prevalence of
ectoparasites.
|
|
Ectoparasite
species |
Prevalence (%) |
Category |
|
1. |
Haemadipsa jeylanica |
87.5 |
Usually |
|
2. |
Haemadipsa picta |
75 |
Usually, |
|
3. |
Haematopota pluvialis |
62.5 |
Frequently |
|
4. |
Stomoxys sp. |
75 |
Usually |
|
5. |
Musca domestica |
75 |
Usually |
|
6. |
Tabanus sp.1 |
62.5 |
Frequently |
|
7. |
Tabanus sp.2 |
75 |
Usually |
|
8. |
Tabanus sp.3 |
75 |
Usually |
|
9. |
Tabanus sp.4 |
50 |
Frequently |
|
10 |
Tabanus sp.5 |
62.5 |
Frequently |
Table 4. Intensity of
Ectoparasite Infestation.
|
|
Type of Ectoparasite |
Intensity |
Category |
|
1. |
Haemadipsa jeylanica |
6,42 |
Moderate |
|
2. |
Haemadipsa picta |
6,16 |
Moderate |
|
3. |
Haematopota pluvialis |
6,16 |
Moderate |
|
4. |
Stomoxys sp. |
6,16 |
Moderate |
|
5. |
Musca domestica |
6,5 |
Moderate |
|
6. |
Tabanus sp.1 |
5,8 |
Moderate |
|
7. |
Tabanus sp.2 |
5,3 |
Light |
|
8. |
Tabanus sp.3 |
5,16 |
Light |
|
9. |
Tabanus sp.4 |
3,5 |
Light |
|
10 |
Tabanus sp.5 |
3,4 |
Light |
FOR
IMAGES - - CLICK HERE FOR FULL PDF
REFERENCES
Berliani, K., P. Patana & W. Azmi (2022). Feed
management and health condition of Sumatran Elephant (Elephas maximus
sumatranus) in Conservation Response Unit (CRU), Tangkahan, Langkat, North
Sumatra. IOP Conference Series.: Environmental Earth Sciences 1115 012010. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1115/1/012010
Borror, D.J., C.A. Triplehom & N.F. Jonhson (1992). An
Introduction to Study of Insect (Partosoedjono, S dan Mukayat, D.B.).
Yogyakarta, 1083 pp.
Butler, J.F., A.G. Maruniak, F. Meek & J.E. Maruniak (2010). Wild
Florida house flies (Musca domestica) as carrier of pathogenic bacteria. Florida
Entomologist 93(2): 218–223. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.093.0211
Changbunjong, T., B. Bhusri, P. Sedwisai, T. Weluwanarak, E.
Nitiyamatawat, T. Chareonviriyaphap & J. Ruangsittichai (2018). Species
identification of horse flies (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Thailand using DNA
barcoding. Veterinary Parasitology 259: 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.07.002
Chareonviriyaphap, T. (2012). Diversity
of Stomoxys spp (Diptera: Muscidae) and diurnal variation of activity of
Stomoxys indicus, and S. calcitrans in a farm in Wang Nam Khiao
District, Nakhon Rat-chasima province, Thailand. Parasite. 19: 259–265. https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2012193259
Christopher, L. (1987). Peterson First Guide to Insects
of North America. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, New York, 128 pp.
Cruz-Vazquez, C, I.V. Mendoza, M.R. Parra & Z. Garcia-Vazuez (2004). Influence
of Temperature, Humidity, and Rainfall on Field Population Trend of Stomoxys
calcitrans (Diptera: Muscidae) in a Semiarid Climate in Mexico. Parasitol. Latinoam
59(3-4): 99–103. http://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-77122004000300002
Desquesnes, M., P. Holzumer, D.H. Lai, A. Dargantes, Z.R. Lun & S.
Jittaplapong (2012). Trypanosoma evansi and Surra: A Review and
Perspective on Origin, History, Distribution, Taxonomy, Morphology, Host, and
Pathogenic Effects. BioMed Research International 2013: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/194176
Foil, L.D. & J.A. Hogsette (1994). Biology and
Control of Tabanids, Stable Flies and Horn Flies. Revue Scientifique et
Technique - Office International des Epizooties 13(4): 1125–1158. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.13.4.821
Hadi, U.K., S. Soviana & I.R.C. Pratomo (2016). Prevalence
of ticks and tick-borne diseases in Indonesian dogs. Journal of Veterinary
Science and Technology 7(3): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7579.1000330
Huang, Y., S. Shinonaga & H. Sasaki (2007). Studies on
the muscid flies associated with pasturing cattle and buffaloes in Taiwan
(Diptera: Muscidae). J. Rakuno Gakuen Univ. 32(11): 15–20. https://rakuno.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/4531/files/S-32-1-15.pdf
Iqbal, A, M.S. Sajid, M.N. Khan & G. Muhammad (2014).
Epizootiology of ectoparasitic fauna infesting selected domestic cattle
population of Punjab, Pakistan. Int J Agri Biol. 16: 443–6. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/20143189947
Kalshoven, L.G.E. (1981). Pest of Crops in Indonesia.
Revised and translated by van der Laan. Jakarta, 701 pp.
Kaufman, P.E., D.A. Rutz & S. Frisch (2005). Large
Sticky Traps for Capturing House Flies and Stable Flies in Dairy Calf
Greenhouse Facilities. J. Dairy Sci. 88: 176–181. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)72676-X
Levine, N.D. (1990). Textbook of Veterinary Parasitology.
Gajah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta, 544 pp.
Masmeatathip, R., C. Ketavan & G. Duvalvet (2006).
Morphological studies of Stomoxys spp. (Diptera: Muscidae) in Central Thailand.
Kasetsart J. 40(4):872–881. https://li01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/anres/article/view/243828
Phasuk, J, A. Prabaripai & T. Chareonviriyaphap (2013). Seasonality
and daily flight activity of stable flies (Diptera: Muscidae) on dairy farms in
Saraburi Province. Parasite 20: 17. https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2013016
Onyido, A.E., J. Azubuike, E.S. Amadi, M.O. Obiukwu, N.A. Ozumba &
O.O. Ikpeze (2011). A survey of public health disease vectors
breeding in refuse dumps in Onitsha Metropolis, Anambra State Nigeria. New
York Science Journal 4(9): 34–39. http://scialert.net/jindex.php?issn=1816-4943
Russell, N., K.C. Twiss, D.C. Orton & G.A. Demirergi (2013). More on the
Çatalhöyük mammal remains. In: Hodder, I. (ed.). Humans and Landscapes of
Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons: 213–58. Cotsen Institute of
Archaeology, Los Angeles.
Sanchez, H.A. & J.L. Cappinera (2014). House Fly,
Musca domestica linneaus (Diptera: Muscidae). The Entomology and Nematology
Department. IFAS Extension. 6. https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-in205-1998
Sahito, H.A., T. Kousar, M.A. Mughal, W.M. Mangrio, Z.H. Shah, B.D.
Ghumro & F.A. Jatoi (2017). Prevalence of cattle lice; Haematopinus
tuberculastus and Ticks; Haemaphysalis bispinosa on cattle at region
Sukkur, Sindh - Pakistan. International Journal of Research Studies in
Biosciences 5: 1–5. http://doi.org/10.20431/2349-0365.0512001
Saywer, R.T. (1986). Leech Biology and Behavior: Volume II. Feeding,
Biology, Ecology and Systematics. Oxford Science Publications, 420 pp.
Seddon, H.R. (1947). Host check
list of helminth and arthropod parasites present in domesticated animals in
Australia. Canberra, 41 pp.
Soulsby, E.J.L. (1982). Helmiths, Arthropods and
Protozoa of Domesticated Animals 7th Edition. Billiere Tindall,
London., 809 pp.
Taylor, D.B., R.D. Moon & D.R. Mark (2012). Economic
impact of stable flies (Diptera: Muscidae) on dairy and beef cattle production.
Journal Medical Entomology 49(1): 198–209. https://doi.org/10.1603/ME10050
Williams,
E.H. & L.B. Williams (1996). Parasites of
Offshore Big Game Fishes of Puerto Rico and the Western Atlantic. Antillean
College Press, Mayaguez, 383 pp.